I'm new to LinuxMCE, but not new to networking. Why not setup another subnet for LinuxMCE? Leave your existing network in place, setup your core, plug the internet facing nic into your current network, give it a static IP address, then plugin either a cheap switch or another wifi ap (with a different SSId and channel) to the internal NIC on the core, then hang all your MDs off that?

I believe this would also limit traffic on the LinuxMCE network to only media traffic so you should reduce the chance of stuttering or other media issues.

Hopefully this will work because that's what I intend to attempt to do.

But note, as described in the article, when all is said and done, there really is no reason not to have everything on the internal network, the topology is the same just the nodes in different places, and that way the network is simpler and requires less hardware. Don't worry about isolating the media traffic, the chances of that causing problems even on a 100M network is vanishingly small (unless you intend to have 10 MDs all playing media at the same time!)

Unsolicited - you have all the advice you need. The consensus is basically unanimous. If you still want to set it up another way, then do so, but there is zero point continuing to argue the point in this or other threads. To do so would likely be considered trolling.

Put all the 'good' / home / permanent stuff on the non-default vlan. Then when new, temporary stuff comes in, it ends up on Default. And you can set up policies and procedures as to how you want to deal with that.

But ... under the scenario mentioned, kids friend comes over with his laptop ... presumably your child's computer is a media device (he can play video, music, whatever, on it from the media library), and therefore on vlan 1. But the friend's computer would land on vlan 0.

I'm assuming they want to play a death match against each other, or something, via computer. [What the heck do _I_ know about this stuff, I'm guessing here!]

May get tricky defining what traffic can autonomously travel between the two vlans.

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

If you do some hard thinking about why, you can probably answer the question yourself. But don't put out that effort if you're not willing to consider the answers as valid. [That is NOT a shot.]

Reasonable people generally do reasonable things. One of the reasons you have to keep asking 'Why?' is because what's reasonable depends upon you're perspective / where you're coming from. Perhaps the perspectives boil down to a perspective of "What we have." or "What we're offering." vs. one of "What we want." It gets further complicated with elements of not knowing we wanted it but got it, and having got it, why do we not also have something else.

I'm trying to think of a couple of examples. Perhaps these will do ... (1) People got text messaging on their phones - it was a new, and now de rigeur, thing. It didn't take too long until people started saying what do you mean only 168 (or whatever) characters at a time! (2) [Ontario, Canada] Phones have been coming with bluetooth. Why the heck can't I buy one with wi-fi from my carriers! (Different answer for that, because carriers can't collect data charges when you go over wi-fi, but the principle, given X logically wanting Y, is the same.)

If lmce is a black box home control system, it is also a computer. As such it must peacefully and instantly co-exist with the computers already in the home. Since it does not, people must 'break their systems.' Or, people must double-device and double-DSL their homes, which they find unacceptable.

I suspect things ultimately boil down to a learning curve / non-zero time to a finished integral installation / home network. And that's a constantly moving target in our dynamic world - so I don't think 'why?' is going to be solved any time soon. Merely which particular thing they're breaking that day.

After all, things must go through a beta / testing stage. It doesn't just spring into being in instant perfection.

Everyone is just going to have to deal.

That being said, someone simply asking 'Why?', as in "You people are idiots.", is not productive or conducive. People only break their systems (as in, work outside the box) to accomplish required, at least to them, functionality. If that required functionality were already present, they wouldn't be 'breaking' their systems.

I do get your perspective though - frustration, and, there are only so many hours in a day. And, as I say above, perfect results don't spring out of thin air.

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

Unsolicited - you have all the advice you need. The consensus is basically unanimous. If you still want to set it up another way, then do so, but there is zero point continuing to argue the point in this or other threads. To do so would likely be considered trolling.

I'm confused. I no longer even remember what started this thread, but it has meandered into all sorts of interesting discussions.

Looking back, it's not even my thread, as far as I can tell. So I'm not sure why I'm being singled out.

In this DHCP thread, if I was seeking an answer, my answer was received long ago - you will have to re-write dhcpd.conf occasionally. (Since then, these other interesting discussions have occurred.)

I'm not sure which consensus you're talking about - there have been 3 or 4 community / forum recognized solutions to DHCP use presented herein.

I certainly don't intend to be trolling. I don't think I've been arguing. But I'm happy to be shown the error of my ways.

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

What I mean by that is that when my kids comes over and plug their laptops in or connect to the wireless, LinuxMCE would give me the 'found new shit'. With my PC network and LinuxMCE network separate, my Core will only detect hardware I intentionally want to connect to LinuxMCE.

Isn't this what the 2nd DHCP range is for?

Or could you avoid this problem by assigning IPs to mac addresses? (This is done by entering device IP addresses for each device, accomplishing, essentially, static DHCP addresses?)

Hey, if non-DHCP addresses are placed in the device entry, does this not inherently segregate out non-designated lmce devices by virtue of them being within the DHCP range? Do out of range / static IP-Mac dhcpd.conf entries get made?

And can someone explain ... if I have two ranges specified, say 1-100 and 101-200, where does a newly receiving DHCP device land?

« Last Edit: April 18, 2009, 06:54:20 am by unsolicited »

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

If lmce is a black box home control system, it is also a computer. As such it must peacefully and instantly co-exist with the computers already in the home. Since it does not, people must 'break their systems.' Or, people must double-device and double-DSL their homes, which they find unacceptable.

some see LMCE as complete solution/appliance.. so that "must" is also a point of view :-)

If lmce is a black box home control system, it is also a computer. As such it must peacefully and instantly co-exist with the computers already in the home. Since it does not, people must 'break their systems.' Or, people must double-device and double-DSL their homes, which they find unacceptable.

some see LinuxMCE as complete solution/appliance.. so that "must" is also a point of view :-)br, Hari

Absolutely.

But I suspect such are quite significantly in the minority. If these forums, etc. are in any way representative of your audience, then I think this is born out. Granted - common thinking says only a very small percentage of the whole even participates in such. But that thinking also seems to agree, in my impression, that those being vocal are the thin end of some wedge.

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

While the setup that I plan to have is not standard, it meets the requirements of LMCE and my own. I am currently far from having the network layed out as i plan, but in the end it will work great. http://wiki.linuxmce.org/index.php/User:Pnuts

The initial Linksys Router will have wireless disabled unless I am going to be working on the core. This way my wife will be able to access the internet if the core is down. When I am not doing this, the Wireless access point will provide wireless for the Cores internal network.

The 2 switches I use are also managed switches, so while i am doing the conversion of my current network to the planned one built around LMCE, I can setup VLANs and move over each room as i see fit. While doing this I simply have a cat5 from the original linksys to the switch after the LMCE Core and with Vlan its all set.

So would it work to do as Oatz said in his first post and disable linuxmce's firewall and use the gateway before its firewall? And also having to re-edit the dhcpd.conf on reboots.

I am not a LinuxMCE expert. My best guess is:- turning off the LinuxMCE firewall exposes you to the big bad world. If you have another firewall in place before the LinuxMCE machine, then the big bad world isn't getting to it, so you should have no additional issues beyond what you already have.- my sense is that dhcpd.conf is re-written at each detection of new device, not at restart. So that's the point at which you would reschmuck dhcpd.conf. I also sense that you could just turn off LinuxMCE's DHCP and use another, _but_ LinuxMCE would lose the ability to detect new devices - you would have to manually add them on your own. Not just to your network / dhcp, but to LinuxMCE as well. - if you are not using lmce for home control / mobile orbiters, this may not be a big issue. In that situation, you are not frequently adding / (re)moving devices. If you are moving about from room to room with your orbiter (bluetooth / wi-fi device, cell) then dhcp is how lmce tracks what's where, to control what. e.g. If you wander about from room to room and use an orbiter to change the tv channel, you want it changing the channel in the room that you are currently in, not the room that you were just in.

You are defeating the intent of lmce in doing these things. If the functionality lost in doing so is not of concern to you, then you're still good to go. IIRC.

Logged

c. 2009 - ALL rights reserved. No duplication, in whole or in part, permitted.

Ya that was my intentions to use my Gateways firewall. I really don't have any new devices being added as they are all registered. I will still keep linuxmce the IP distribution box though to keep its functionality.

[..]If you are moving about from room to room with your orbiter (bluetooth / wi-fi device, cell) then dhcp is how lmce tracks what's where, to control what. e.g. If you wander about from room to room and use an orbiter to change the tv channel, you want it changing the channel in the room that you are currently in, not the room that you were just in.

This is not correct. DHCP has nothing to do with tracking the movement of the user. The movement of the user is detected, either by using the follow me functionality of the fiire chiefs, or by utilizing Bluetooth (with the mobile orbiter on the Bluetooth device iirc)

One of the functions that DHCP performs is detecting new devices, particularly as you turn Orbiters on and off. Another, and critical one, is enabling MD functionality. Without DHCP, no MDs. full stop. If you are not using HA or multiple MDs, then I suspect that LMCE is not the product for you. Try MythTV, VDR or XBMC....

Shaz - you haven't said anything at all about why you want to turn off the firewall. Quite simply, Why?? If you want to use another firewall, then do so! Why do you feel this implies you need to turn off the one in LMCE? Are you afraid of being too safe?! Just leave it on, as it too performs other functions in LMCE.

You are talking about turning off the firewall and DHCP, loosing Orbiter, MDs, pnp, QoS, having to manually edit DHCP at various intervals, etc, but I don't see any reason for doing any of this. Just leave both on. If you want also to use your own firewall, then do so. But don't make this any more complicated than you need to.